Madam, - In an otherwise well argued piece on the EU's draft services directive (Opinion & Analysis, January 26th), Mark Hennessy refers to fears that the directive would lead to a "race to the bottom", in which low-paid workers from new accession states will replace higher-earning staff in the richer states.
In response to the Labour Party and trade union argument that the draft directive would mean that low-paid immigrants would inevitably price Irish workers out of the market, he states bluntly:" This is simply not the case".
Mr Hennessy relies heavily on another EU directive, the 1996 Posting of Workers Directive, to justify his argument. He says that any workers posted abroad for more than eight days from their home state are covered by this directive, under which temporarily assigned workers are entitled to the minimum terms and conditions available in a host country, or in a particular trade or profession in the host country.
I am afraid this analysis over-simplifies the position. The reality about the 1996 directive is that its terms are vague, uncertain and unreliable. It is over a year since the European Parliament formally identified and listed the problems and called for a radical overhaul of this legislation.
Some basic examples. First, there is no agreed definition of a "worker" to which the directive should apply in the first place. In cases where this concept has not been well defined in national law - which is the case in Ireland - there is a risk of what the European Parliament describes as "pseudo self-employment", or economically dependent employment. Revenue Commissioner audits of the Irish construction industry would more than justify the assertion that pseudo self-employment has become a feature of the Irish workplace.
Second, there is no obvious correlation between the "minimum wage" to which the directive guarantees access and the "minimum wage" referred to in Irish legislation. And the interaction between these concepts and the wages fixed in sectoral collective agreements or registered employment agreements is not obvious, to put it mildly.
Third, apart from uncertainties as to the scope and applicability of the directive given the ambiguous terminology, it is also almost fatally undermined by a series of procedural weaknesses. There is no right of access to information about rights under the directive; there is no protection for those who report breaches; there is little or no co-operation and information exchange between states at official level; and there is also little or no compliance monitoring.
In conclusion, therefore, the position is that the 1996 directive on temporary postings of workers is simply not working. Rather than rely on it to buttress the position of those under threat from the new draft services directive, the 1996 directive itself needs considerable revision before it can become remotely effective in achieving its original objectives. - Yours, etc,
PAT RABBITTE TD, Labour Party Leader, Dáil Éireann, Dublin 2.